By Terrance Thornton | Digital Free Press
The Goldwater Institute Tuesday, June 18, filed a lawsuit in Maricopa County Superior Court against the city of Scottsdale claiming the municipality is using ‘objectively false or misleading information’ while using public resources to influence the outcome of the .15% sales tax question set to appear on the November 2024 general election ballot.
In little over a year, the sales tax in question — originally meant to fund land purchases and the creation of new trailheads within the McDowell Sonoran Preserve — will sunset within municipal bounds, but city leaders have come to terms on a November ballot question asking voters to replace the expiring sales tax with a .15% sales tax to be installed for the next 30 years.
Filed on behalf of former Mayor Jim Lane and Scottsdale residents Yvonne Cahill and Susan Wood, the Goldwater Institute alleges, the city of Scottsdale is:
- Communicating ‘objectively false or misleading information’ as the Goldwater Institute alleges the municipality cannot describe the new sales tax as a continuation of the an expiring tax meant for a different purpose set by voter approval; and
- The Goldwater Institute alleges the city of Scottsdale is seeking to influence the outcome of the November 2024 vote because certain published election FAQs ‘omit key information and use rhetorical strategy designed to influence the election outcome.’
The remedy? The Goldwater Institute is asking for the city of Scottsdale to remove the .15% sales tax ballot question from the slate of November election items for voters to decide at the upcoming general election.
Read the complaint for yourself HERE.
City leaders estimate if voters approve the new sales tax measure city coffers could see an influx of $25 million on an annual basis for the next 30 years, which they say will go to pay for unfunded needs citywide meanwhile paying for WestWorld of Scottsdale infrastructure improvements.
In 1995 and in 2004, Scottsdale voters approved a 0.20% tax — the 0.20% preserve tax today in question — to fund land acquisition only and a 0.15% tax to fund land acquisition and improvements in the McDowell Sonoran Preserve.
Revenues from the 0.20% preserve tax and the 0.15% land and improvement tax were used to acquire over 30,000 acres of land now knows as the McDowell Sonoran Preserve that entailed constructing 12 trailheads and 235 miles of trails in the preserve.
Today, the McDowell Sonoran Preserve is a beloved amenity known the world over as the single largest municipal land preserve in the United States, officials at City Hall say.
The legal challenge to the November sales tax ballot effort is scheduled to be heard Tuesday, July 2, by Judge Michael Gordon in Maricopa County Superior Court, 201 W. Jefferson St. in downtown Phoenix.
Carla Carla, campaign coordinator for the Vote Yes, Yes Scottsdale political action committee, says it is unfortunate the extent a few residents are going to halt a public vote.
“It is unfortunate that a small group of people are trying to take way our citizens’ right to vote on something that we care greatly about — our parks, the preserve and public safety,” she said in a June 24 phone interview. “Why can’t they trust that the voters of Scottsdale are wise enough to make our own decisions?”
Ms. Carla explains the ballot language points out the .15% sales tax ballot questions is listed as a ‘replacement’ tax.
“About the issue of the usage of the work ‘extension,’ it was the task force that recommended that language,” she said. “The City Council, in their wisdom, made the ballot language correction to make it very clear the measure is a replacement. The city goes overboard to be careful to not do any electioneering — that is our job at the PAC.”
Scottsdale City Councilman Barry Graham says he and his colleague — Councilwoman Kathy Littlefield — sought more information last February when the public hearing on the matter was held at City Hall, 3939 N. Drinkwater Blvd.
“Councilwoman Littlefield and I had doubts about the city telling residents that a new tax was an extension and reduction of a different tax,” he said. “That’s partly why she and I requested a work-study, so residents could hear us openly discuss these questions. Unfortunately, residents weren’t allowed that work-study opportunity, which council rejected by a 4-3 vote.”
Former Mayor Jim Lane spoke with the Digital Free Press regarding the complaint he co-authored.
“‘Replace and reduce’ that is the terminology that they landed on,” Mr. Lane said in a June 24 phone interview. “It does not replace any issue at all — it is simply a new tax. If you want to have a new tax to fund a use that is fine, just tell the people what you are doing. The real essence of our complaint is that it is not real clear and deceptive to a point in its ‘reduce-and-replace’ language.”
Mr. Lane explains he believes the ballot language undermines the public trust.
“It is always troublesome for me when government tries to sell or market something like an increase in taxes in an obscure or deceptive kind of way,” he said. “It undermines their own credibility and increases skepticism around what motivations really are.”